Isn't there some sort of ExpressionEvaluator service in HiveMind now? Is
that where you'd plug in another expression language?
-Original Message-
From: Ben Eng [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 3:33 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussio
Howard,
I was only offering up an idea in response to your comment about OGNL
not providing an adequate solution for Tapestry 5. You seemed to be
searching for an expression language that could translate into both
server-side and client-side implementations.
Ben
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:07:13A
Everything will be pluggable, just like in Tapestry 4. Why not create this
for Tapesty 4 today?
On 8/8/06, Ben Eng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Howard,
How about adopting XPath expressions as an alternative to OGNL? Apache
Commons JXPath could provide a server-side implementation, while
somethi
Howard,
How about adopting XPath expressions as an alternative to OGNL? Apache
Commons JXPath could provide a server-side implementation, while
something like Google AJAXSLT can implement XPath (as a part of XSLT)
in JavaScript on the client side. See
http://goog-ajaxslt.sourceforge.net/
Ben
On
Sorry for adding further flame on this discussun (not my intention) but
it's very sad to see all this
discussions about Tapestry 5 and I need to say a few words.
I was a big fan of Tap and was the only one in my company who stood up
for it.
We used it for a few big projects for major Swiss ba
As per my early blog post (
http://howardlewisship.com/blog/2006/03/from-fanciful-ideas-category.html ),
I would like to see object editting be dirt simple in Tapestry 5, using
built in components. I'll be discussing some of this with Chris Nelson this
weekend.
I would like to see Trails5 be an
> My goal is not to beat JSF, but to give Java developers a compelling
> reason to stay on Java and not jump over to Ruby on Rails. That's a
> tall order.
I think that's a very strong motivation indeed. I'm glad you are thinking
along those lines.
Having played around with ASP.NET/C# recently I
"Epstein, Ezra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/08/2006 21:31:27:
> Rather I was questioning how the decision about IoC adoption is
> being made. At the time HiveMind got started the IoC container
> space was pretty open and empty.
I don't really think thats true at all, but Hivemind did have
"Howard Lewis Ship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/08/2006 17:34:47:
I tend to agree with most of what you said.
> The central issue is backwards compatibility. As the upgrade from 2 to
> 3 to 4 has shown, adding new features to Tapestry often breaks
> existing code. This is a reaction to the r
On 8/1/06, Epstein, Ezra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think there's a mis-communication. I do not at all feel HiveMind is
"just an ego trip." Far from it.
Rather I was questioning how the decision about IoC adoption is being
made. At the time HiveMind got started the IoC container space was
's the process of deciding? Is it worth exploring Spring enhancements?
That was the point.
Thanks,
Ezra Epstein
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of hv @ Fashion Content
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 4:27 AM
To: users@tapestry.apache.org
Subject: Re:
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 9:51 AM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Finally, let's take a sober look. Of all the production apps written
in T4, how many do you REALLY BELIEVE would be ported to T5? I'd say 1
of a hundread, if that.
.x for the
future.
All roads lead to 5.x
regards,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: James Carman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 8/1/2006 9:06 AM
To: 'Tapestry users'
Subject: RE: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Mark, you also have to consider a different type of user. For me, a
lliant idea and abandons 5.x, all hell
will break
loose. But from his e-mails, the plan is to maintain and enhance 5.x for the
future.
All roads lead to 5.x
regards,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: James Carman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 8/1/2006 9:06 AM
To: 'Tapestry user
olks aren't very impressed by tools and they don't think that tool support
should be the reason that people choose a platform, but to some they are
very important.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Stang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 10:25 AM
To: Tapestry users; T
t think that tool support
should be the reason that people choose a platform, but to some they are
very important.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Stang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 10:25 AM
To: Tapestry users; Tapestry users
Subject: RE: Tapestry 5 Discussions
I d
2006 7:51 AM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
> Finally, let's take a sober look. Of all the production apps written
> in T4, how many do you REALLY BELIEVE would be ported to T5? I'd say 1
> of a hundread, if that.
On the other hand tapestry p
different
versions to maintain?
-Original Message-
From: Danny Angus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 9:51 AM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
> Finally, let's take a sober look. Of all the production apps written
> in T4, how many do
> Finally, let's take a sober look. Of all the production apps written
> in T4, how many do you REALLY BELIEVE would be ported to T5? I'd say 1
> of a hundread, if that.
On the other hand tapestry provides us the the ability to re-use
components.
If we want to write new applications in Tapestry5
"Finally, let's take a sober look"
Isn't that a bit much to ask? I mean, who's sober on Tuesday?!?!?! :-)
-Original Message-
From: Adam Zimowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 9:35 AM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discuss
ade to T4 because of the
potential headaches. Those people will still be left even further behind in
the dust if there's no easy way for them to migrate their apps to T5.
-Original Message-
From: Adam Zimowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 8:40 AM
To: T
way for them to migrate their apps to T5.
-Original Message-
From: Adam Zimowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 8:40 AM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
There is couple such simple answer to all this:
1) Time will tell..
2) The beauty of ope
eed IMHO). Anyway, this is your
> baby,
> > but if you want to gain some market share, then you should really listen
> > to
> > your users. Tapestry is starting to get a bad reputation for not
> > supporting
> > backward compatibility. Again, I think the direct
Although i haven't really had the chance to use tapestry , i have been
around it since tap3.
Passing from t3 to t4 meant simplification and.. removing almost half of the
t3 code. (tried it on my sample applications )
I can imagine that t5 would be again much simple than t4 , keeping the
overall c
Trashing HiveMind is sort of uninformed(not trying to sling mud). As
previously pointed out you can't really do contributions in Spring. And that
was one of the key T3 features it was supposed to replace.
While I'm not terribly happy about the multitude of concepts involved in
writing a non-triv
06, Korbinian Bachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what exactly do you mean with " to add components programatically" ?
>
> Regards,
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Josh Long [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. J
> What do you think?
I think;
trying out a different approach in a sandbox to achieve improvements that
seem impossible with the current structure is a good thing.
making up your mind early that the future needs another painful revolution
is a bad thing.
But for all I know Howard is just tryi
Personally I don't believe the proposed changes are a significant shift in
the concept of how Tapestry works when compared to version 4.
If that is the case the upgrade from 4 to 5 would be a technical change
only.
On the technical part I should think that a "classic" API could exist in
Tapest
EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 22:52
> An: Tapestry users
> Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
> Actually, the one feature I think id like to see at this
> point (save for some small its-still
> In my personal ideal world, Spring would have implemented the
> namespacing,
> abstraction, visibility and distributed configuration features he
> needs, and
> we could all reuse our Spring knowledge when we find we need to extend
> Tap5.
> At this point all I can hope for is that they implement
Hi,
what exactly do you mean with " to add components programatically" ?
Regards,
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Josh Long [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 22:52
> An: Tapestry users
> Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
>
Tapestry users
Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
I really don't see what all the fuss is about anymore. I've
already stated that I'll be providing "some" form of T4
extension to upgrade to T5 when the time comes for it.
I've been wanting some of the features in T5
If theres a migration path to be had, then Im more than interested in
tapestry 5.
Actually, the one feature I think id like to see at this point (save
for some small its-still-not-final issues with tapestry 4.1) is the
ability to add components programatically.
Everything else seems to be on par
Nice,
Now it would be great if some of the people who complain about lack of
stability actually helped in the migration path. I see some people who
are pretty old Tapestry users.
--
Ing. Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi
DTQ Software
Web Application Design and Programming
http://www.dtqsoftware.com
Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
> I really don't see what all the fuss is about anymore. I've already stated
> that I'll be providing "some" form of T4 extension to upgrade to T5 when
> the
> time comes for it.
> So..There we have it. :)
>
Great! After T3 betas/RCs, T4, I'm looking forward to migrate all ou
liigo wrote:
> tapestry is a open source project.
> before you requires others do or not do something, think what you have
> done for it.
> don't selfish
It'll be selfish keeping my opinions for myself instead of sharing them.
I doubt this discussion aimed to be one about what open source is or
mea
quot;yes use it, because of a, b ,
c and d".
regards
korbinian
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Jesse Kuhnert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 16:31
> An: Tapestry users
> Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
>
> I really don'
gliche Nachricht-
> Von: liigo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 15:38
> An: Tapestry users
> Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
>
> tapestry is a open source project.
> before you requires others do or not do something, think what
> you have done
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: liigo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 30. Juli 2006 15:38
> An: Tapestry users
> Betreff: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
>
> tapestry is a open source project.
> before you requires others do or not do something, thi
"don't selfish" does not help anything. Sigh
On 7/30/06, liigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
tapestry is a open source project.
before you requires others do or not do something, think what you have
done for it.
don't selfish
2006/7/30, Michael Echerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Norbert Sándor wr
tapestry is a open source project.
before you requires others do or not do something, think what you have
done for it.
don't selfish
2006/7/30, Michael Echerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Norbert Sándor wrote:
> - rethink the IOC container of t5 (use hivemind 2.0 or maybe Spring
> instead of a custom "
: Tapestry development
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions -- Nice to see people paying attention
Wow, I have to say I'm pretty disappointed in such talk from someone who is
supposed to be the "chairman" of Hivemind. I'd almost say it sounds kind of
immature.
I support Howa
Norbert Sándor wrote:
> - rethink the IOC container of t5 (use hivemind 2.0 or maybe Spring
> instead of a custom "unsupported" solution)
I also agree that we shouldn't have another IoC container. Spring is the
de facto standard. Either take Spring and work around missing features.
E.g. use naming
ers
will think about whether t6 will have the same slogan?
We all thank the hard work of the committers (especially Howard and
Jesse), but the "Tapestry 5 Discussions" thread shows that there are
some important things to note:
- rethink the IOC container of t5 (use hivemind 2.0 or m
I completely agree with you since myself is also very techie. While, if I
put the business hat on, things are viewed very differently. I personally
have so much experience in this area. Being a Architect, I have to work with
different people at different levels, developers, managers, project
manag
This is something that depends on the ability - and the willingness - to
learn. There are some people who love staying in one job doing the same
thing for years (yeah, they exist, Jesse!), and there are other who
can't stand maintaining legacies just because some pointy haired boss is
afraid of
Well, here is one nice blog entry about frameworks and backwards
compatibility:
http://www.weiqigao.com/blog/2006/07/24/software_development_the_abstraction_dilemma.html
On 7/29/06, Daniel Honig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm shamelessly too intoxicatd to reply, but Ezra encapsulated my thoug
I'm shamelessly too intoxicatd to reply, but Ezra encapsulated my thoughts
tonight.
When he said, Hivemind is about ego, I was silently applauding. I don't
understand
whey the Tpy community cannot talk to Rod and Jurgen and have an
integration.
Let's talk .Net and JEE. For hte past year I have
Bingo.
The issue isn't that having a Tap5 is important, for it is. There will
always be a need to add new features and support new technologies as a
framework expands. The issue I have is that every Tap release doesn't just
add new abilities, it completely scraps the existing code. There are
n
Yes, I could imagine doing it.
We did the same thing when I worked at a large consulting company. I wanted
to leave after the first 4 months(you can only learn so much with vanilla
servlets + templating language enhancements), but stayed on to see through
to the end on a project they started me o
That is one of the reasons. There are others.
In my company we have many (possibly upwords of twenty) web projects going
at any one time in various stages of development. The ability for a
developer from one project to move to, and be productive in, another project
as priority and resources dem
Because, a company that has invested a year or more, developing an app is
probably going to want to use it for a little while. Over the lifetime of an
enterprise app, it will undoubtedly need modification (both bug fixes and
added features.)
When Tapestry 5 arrives, we can safely assume that T
important considerations when making
an adoption decision.
Thanks,
Ezra Epstein
-Original Message-
From: adasal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 3:49 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Seems I am wrong in my earlier post.
Emm, but there is a lot o
AIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I actually prefer hivemind to Spring. Just my 2 cents. I find it easier to
learn and better at what it does.
Kris
- Original Message
From: Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tapestry users
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 3:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5
I actually prefer hivemind to Spring. Just my 2 cents. I find it easier to
learn and better at what it does.
Kris
- Original Message
From: Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tapestry users
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 3:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Som
Sometimes missing features is not a bad thing. If you want people to use
your framework, you need to implement something they can use.
Maybe losing some features and gaining some compatibility isn't such a bad
thing. The rest could come later. This is not a race.
On 7/28/06, D&J Gredler <[EMAIL P
I completely agree with you, and I really wish Spring were up to the task.
However, Howard seems to have done his homework and come to the conclusion
that it can't provide the features he needs for Tap5 (see
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/ioc/index.html).
In my personal ideal world, Spring
o:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 7/28/2006 4:30 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Picking through the name calling and attacks of the original message I
find
one legitimate point that hits very close to home.
I work in a company that has (at a guess) 300+ Java developers (
+1 On replacing hivemind with spring.
-Original Message-
From: Rui Pacheco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 7/28/2006 3:58 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Actually, I support the idea that leaving HiveMind is good.
But not for a new IoC container. We
How did the move from Tap3 to Tap4 require massive rework if you were still in
evaluation?
-Original Message-
From: Steven Bell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 7/28/2006 4:30 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Picking through the name calling and attacks of
witching from HiveMind to TapIoCa (that's my little nickname for
the
> > > Tapestry IoC container), but if you don't want to be tied to
HiveMind
> or
> > > don't want to be constrained by the release schedule, then I
> understand
> > > (although you'
nd to TapIoCa (that's my little nickname for
the
> > > Tapestry IoC container), but if you don't want to be tied to
HiveMind
> or
> > > don't want to be constrained by the release schedule, then I
> understand
> > > (although you're a big part
y and we can
easily
> > accommodate any changes you could need IMHO). Anyway, this is your
> baby,
> > but if you want to gain some market share, then you should really
listen
> > to
> > your users. Tapestry is starting to get a bad reputation for not
> > supporting
>
ed IMHO). Anyway, this is your
baby,
> but if you want to gain some market share, then you should really listen
> to
> your users. Tapestry is starting to get a bad reputation for not
> supporting
> backward compatibility. Again, I think the direction you're heading is
a
&
on't have to consider your current users, but we don't
have that luxury.
-Original Message-
From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 12:09 PM
To: Tapestry development
Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 Discussions
Right now its impossible because there&
65 matches
Mail list logo
